Skip to content
Car Crime U.K.

Car Crime U.K.

Understanding Vehicle Theft, Fraud and Identity

Menu
  • Vehicle Crime
    • ‘Form A Squad’ – Ineffective Action
      • The Vehicle Crime Task Force (VCT) – 2019
      • 2022 to 2023 National Vehicle Crime Working Group
    • Stolen Vehicle Recovery – Found in the U.K.
    • Stolen Vehicle Recovery – Found Abroad
    • OPERATION IGNEOUS – reducing reported car theft by 30%
    • Title Law
  • LoS* Data
  • Guidance / Help
    • Abbreviations & Terminology
    • Resources
      • Your Vehicle Theft Insurance Claim
      • Police Contact Emails
    • Links
  • Police Reports
    • Police Theft Reports
    • Police Collision Reports
    • Police Disclosure Delays
  • News
  • Policy & Research
  • Articles Archive
  • Contact
Menu

260112 Police Scotland Internal Review (LoS Stats)

12/01/2026 to Police Scotland seeking an Internal Review

Subject: Request for review – Refusal under FOISA ss.25 and 27

I request an internal review of your response to my information request seeking:

The total number of recorded incidents of theft of a motor vehicle for calendar years 2023, 2024 and 2025.

I am dissatisfied with the response for the reasons set out below.

  1. Section 25(1) – “Reasonably obtainable”

You rely on section 25(1) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (“FOISA”) on the basis that the information is publicly available via a multi-sheet Excel workbook and can be obtained by filtering the data manually.
While I accept that Police Scotland publishes crime statistics in spreadsheet form, I do not accept that this renders the information I requested “reasonably obtainable” within the meaning of section 25(1).

My request was for a single numerical figure (or three figures), not for access to a raw dataset requiring:

• navigation of a large spreadsheet,
• application of filters,
• interpretation of crime classifications, and
• aggregation of results.

The information I seek is clearly held in an aggregated form, as it is the same data Police Scotland uses internally and for official publications. FOISA does not permit an authority to refuse a request merely because the applicant could derive the answer themselves through data processing.

OSIC decisions consistently distinguish between:
• information being available, and
• information being reasonably obtainable in the form requested.

Requiring an applicant to perform data extraction and aggregation in order to obtain a single headline number is overly onerous and inconsistent with the purpose and spirit of FOISA.

  1. Failure to comply with the duty to advise and assist (section 15 FOISA)

Although your response cites section 16 (refusal notice), it does not demonstrate compliance with section 15, which places a positive duty on authorities to advise and assist applicants.
Where a requester seeks a simple numerical answer derived from published data, reasonable assistance would include:

• confirming the figure directly, or
• providing a short table or summary.

Directing an applicant to a complex spreadsheet and instructing them to “filter” data does not meet the standard of assistance envisaged by section 15, particularly where the burden on the authority to extract the figure would be minimal.

  1. Section 27(1) – Information intended for future publication

You also rely on section 27(1) to withhold data for July–December 2025.
While I accept that section 27(1) can apply where there is a settled intention to publish, the exemption is qualified and subject to a public interest test.
In this case:

• The information requested is high-level statistical data, not sensitive operational material.
• The request concerns vehicle crime trends, a matter of clear public interest.
• Partial disclosure (e.g. provisional or to-date figures) would not prejudice publication.

Your response does not explain:

• the precise publication date,
• whether the intention to publish was settled at the time of the request, or
• why the public interest favours withholding a simple numerical total.

A blanket refusal without this reasoning does not satisfy FOISA requirements.

  1. Overall proportionality and purpose of FOISA

FOISA exists to promote transparency and meaningful public access to information. Expecting an applicant to independently process raw statistical data in order to extract a basic figure undermines that purpose.
This is particularly so where:

• the information is already held in summary form, and
• disclosure would involve negligible additional effort.

  1. Remedy sought

I therefore ask that, on review, Police Scotland:

  1. Provide the total number of recorded incidents of theft of a motor vehicle for calendar years 2023 and 2024 directly; and
  2. Reconsider the application of section 27(1) to 2025 data, or provide a clearer and more specific justification for its continued withholding.

I look forward to your review response within the statutory timeframe.

Yours faithfully,

Recent Posts:

  • The Problem With Crime Numbers:
  • When Recorded Theft Is Not Believed
  • NaVCIS Funding: Still No Specifics
  • Agreed Police disclosure procedures not followed
  • £50 for a Police Report Update?
  • Section 184 Data Protection Act 2018
  • Keyless Taking or Key Questions?
  • When ‘Sale or Return’ Goes Wrong
  • BBC Crimewatch ‘Car Cloning’
  • Keyless Vehicle Theft:
  • Accusations of Criminality
  • Thefts Down – Except for Newer Cars!
  • Increase Pre-Crush Retention Period to 28 days?
  • Reducing Vehicle Theft by up to 30%
  • ‘The Others’ … are you among them?
  • Vehicle Abandonments Raise Questions Over Theft Claims
  • The State of Vehicle Taking in the UK: A Crisis of Enforcement, Not Engineering
  • Keystone Krooks – but £1.4 million stolen!
  • 2024 Vehicle Theft – how well (or otherwise) did your constabulary perform?
  • Vehicle Crime. Is Police Language Bluring Facts?
  • Superficial Approach to Vehicle Taking Overlooked Organised Crime
  • Keyless Vehicle Taking – Really?
  • Accuracy & Consistency Required
  • Do we need new legislation?
  • A System Built on Blind Faith? The Flaws in Police Information Dissemination
  • Which? … What?
  • The Rise & Fall of Operation Igneous
  • Vehicle Taking – Quantity not Quality
  • Vehicle Theft: 30 years of Complacency
  • The Devalued Crime Report
  • Vehicle Theft Surge Demands Police Action on Crime Report Disclosures
  • FoIA – Staffordshire Police are not the worst offenders
  • Vehicle Repatriation
  • Crime Number Devaluation
  • Manufacturers Cause Vehicle Thefts …
  • PNC LoS Report Weeding
  • Staff-less-shire Police Report Disclosures
  • W. Mercia Police – RTC Report Disclosures
  • Delaying Finalisation of Insurance Claims (for some)
  • Policing (or not?) Vehicle Theft
  • Fraud Not Theft … face the facts!
  • Cloned Plates: Register of Keepers – Lacking Integrity?
  • Police Theft Report Disclosure
  • Headlamp Dazzle & Eye-Snatching
  • Scrap ‘six-week weeding’ of stolen vehicle VRMs
  • Police Vehicle Theft Reports – A Lack Of Understanding And Standardisation

Legal Disclaimer
The information provided on this website is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. While we strive to ensure the accuracy and relevance of the content, laws and regulations change frequently, and the application of legal principles varies based on specific circumstances.

No Legal Advice
Nothing on this website constitutes legal, financial, or professional advice. You should not rely on the information provided here as a substitute for seeking qualified legal counsel. If you require legal advice or guidance, we strongly recommend consulting a licensed solicitor or legal professional.

No Liability
We make every effort to keep the information up to date and accurate, but we do not guarantee the completeness, correctness, or applicability of any content. We accept no responsibility or liability for any errors, omissions, or reliance placed on the information contained within this site.

External Links & Third-Party Content
Any external links or references provided are for convenience only and do not constitute endorsement. We are not responsible for the accuracy, legality, or content of any external sites or third-party materials linked from this website.

User Responsibility
It is the responsibility of all users to verify the accuracy and relevance of any information before relying upon it. If you have a legal issue, you should seek advice from a qualified professional relevant to your situation.

By using this website, you acknowledge and agree to this disclaimer. If you do not agree, you should discontinue use of the site immediately.

© 2026 Car Crime U.K. | Powered by Superbs Personal Blog theme